Oh dear,

If you check carefully through my posts I have yet to call anyone racist, but I do attempt to analyze and pull apart the discursive and elementary components of racism (in the posts of others), using my own interpretations and by reference to the 'sentiment' that Chek Ling discusses.

I too would prefer people (like yourself) to fully understand racism as a mostly ideologically blind cultural condition rather than a tag that can be loosely thrown around without explanation. You can, as I have many times, discuss racism openly and honestly with a view to move forward.

This is completely different from what you propose - which is not to call anyone racist (no matter what) and to never fully explore racism as a sociological and intellectual phenomenon. (The blindfolded approach)

In other words lets all adopt that good old ostrich position when discussing racism by conveniently mystifying and calling it something else, something less abrasive and ameliorative to good old liberal sensibilities and those tired egalitarian mythologies about Australian society. Yawn,Ho Hum, been there, done that, moved on.

Now, read through the above again –did I call you a racist throughout this post?
I admit that I am cheeky, even arrogant but when and if I ever call someone racist you can bet I’ve done my homework. I suggest you do the same before you ask people like to me adopt your Ostrich, head in a hole worldviews. Be careful, the only thing people see when you're in this position is your bum and after a while many may begin to think its your head (ie, where you speak from)

It was me!

Yep I called Davo racist. Guilty as charged. And this is where things get interesting. I am white, so I feel that I have been able to say things to some of our less enlightened posters to this forum, that someone of a darker skin colour than I would’ve been able to get away with.

Eg, Rainier, Chek, Kutsohiro have all been very polite – much more polite and restrained than I have been. If any of these posters had written what I have we’d hear the screams from the Cape York Peninsula to the a.se-end of Tassie.

The fact that I can get away with saying something simply because I’m white underscores a covert form of racism. This is the double standard to which Chek’s article refers.

If you are black, brown or especially of middle eastern origin right now, better watch how you phrase things – better be REALLY polite. Otherwise white folks will accuse you of behaving exactly like them.

Rainer

you have a wounderful capacity for misrepresenting wot l said, l suspect as a way of making your points. That my friend is a very long yaaaaaaaaaaaawn indeed. If you have a point to make, then make it and own it rather than attributing it to someone else. l made no sweeping statements about world views in my initial post, just a very sarcastic dig at the modus of the article.

l dont care if people use the r word. l just think that it is very lazy characterisation of very complex issues regarding sociology. For example, l doubt folks wake up one day and decide to indulge in a pathalogical hate for a particular race. It may more likely be a function of many factors, the main one being deep levels of discontent which they feel unable to overcome and thus SCAPEGOAT some group because they are DIFFERENT. The nature of the differnce (race, gender, religion, economic) hardly matters in validating that discontent. The prejudice is the cough not the cold. That opens up a vast array of contemplatng WHY people project their discontent onto others. That discussion would be quite complex, invlove way too much unpleasant honest self appraisal, but like l say... thinking hurts, so why bother when we have glib reductionist rhetoric to bandy about. It is the easy way out, it actually stops a real discourse because its a smoke screen and it cheapens the issue.

l know, first hand, what it is like to be a target of racism, went around for years shutting up people by calling them racists and learned to put that nonsense in its box many moons ago. Took my head out of the sand and got rid of the ostrich suit too.

As for ostrich bums and heads in the sand... can l borrow your ostrich outfit and can you make some room down there for me please? Will be joining you soon.

ps. nothing to see here, l give up, you win.

The score so far:

• Anti-racists - 100

• Benign racists and racism rationalists - nil

• Ostriches - still have head in hole in the sand and have become very grumpy.

• Fence sitters – still sitting on fence being fastidiously objective (read uncommitted)

Get over it Rainer.

There are two types of racism.Petty and defensive.The former is the stomping ground of idiots who like to call people names,the second is one of the most important parts of our core make-up.

When societies choose to become multi-ethnic(which just about every 'first world' country is besides Japan),they can either follow the path of mass assimilation or multiculturalism.Assimilation can only work on a macro level when there are no significant physical or religious differences between said ethnic groups(eg Britain when the Angles,Saxons,Danes and Normans merged to become English).This is something that so called 'conservatives' like Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones can never seem to fathom.They simply can't get their head around the fact that an indigenous-Australian or an Asian-Australian may not want to throw away their ethnic identity because they now have access to British common law and Coca-Cola.

So we are left with multiculturalism,whether the government promotes it or not.The only problem with multiculturalism as it currently stands,is that if a 'white' person in Australia(or anywhere else) asserts his/her ethnic identity,he/she risks being called a 'racist'.A community of -insert any non-white ethnicity here-,who wish to ghettoise to keep alive their culture,language,customs etc and form support networks is accepted as part of the multicultural mosaic of a 'diverse' society.However,a community of whites who wish to do the same,are labelled insular,racist,backward and not cosmopolitan enough.The fact is,BOTH cases are racist,not in a petty way,but in a defensive way.In-group ethnic identification is a fact of life for the majority of people.Genetic interests exist.Until we accept this,we won't get over petty back and forth name calling.

Chek Ling should not be surprised that most white Australians seem to subconsciously empathise with Schapelle Corby against what they perceive as some(stereotyped) 'other'.Just as white Australians should not be surprised that Chek Ling,from the perspective of his own racial interests, sees(stereotyped) racist 'white Australia',even after being here 43 years,as something that needs to be overcome.